SSEC05. Session B: Space Transportationhttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/8010
Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:29:51 GMT2015-08-02T18:29:51ZNational Security Space Enterprise Engineeringhttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/8023
National Security Space Enterprise Engineering
Hagemeier, Hal
Space provides critical capabilities for all sectors of our society. Today's world depends on space capabilities for weather and climate monitoring, remote sensing, scientific investigation and commercial and financial transactions. Defense and intelligence decision makers depend on our space programs for reconnaissance, intelligence, surveillance, warning, communications, global positioning and navigation.
There is value to addressing national security space from an enterprise perspective. We can be more effective and efficient by appropriate enterprise engineering. An enterprise consists of people, processes, and technology interacting with each other and their environment to achieve goals. The mission of the National Security Space Office is to Integrate and coordinate defense and intelligence space activities to achieve unity of effort.
This conference features the work of authors from: Georgia Tech's Space Systems Design Lab, Aerospace Systems Design Lab, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Tech Research Institute; NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Marshall Space Flight Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, Langley Research Center; and other aerospace industry and academic institutions
Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/80232005-11-10T00:00:00ZHagemeier, HalSpace provides critical capabilities for all sectors of our society. Today's world depends on space capabilities for weather and climate monitoring, remote sensing, scientific investigation and commercial and financial transactions. Defense and intelligence decision makers depend on our space programs for reconnaissance, intelligence, surveillance, warning, communications, global positioning and navigation.
There is value to addressing national security space from an enterprise perspective. We can be more effective and efficient by appropriate enterprise engineering. An enterprise consists of people, processes, and technology interacting with each other and their environment to achieve goals. The mission of the National Security Space Office is to Integrate and coordinate defense and intelligence space activities to achieve unity of effort.Simplifying Complex Problems with Systems Engineering Tools:
a Lunar Architecture Analysis Case Studyhttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/8024
Simplifying Complex Problems with Systems Engineering Tools:
a Lunar Architecture Analysis Case Study
Percy, Thomas K.
The analysis of lunar mission architectures is a complex problem dealing
with many different propulsive elements and payloads moving through a
series of locations to deliver humans and cargo to the moon. While the
general systems engineering process is largely tied to the development of
an end product, many of the tools commonly employed by systems
engineers can be used to simplify these complex and abstract mission
analyses. These tools can help the analyst gain a better overall
understanding of the problem, its trends and possible solutions by better
defining element interactions and functions. Sensitivity studies that
employ trade tree analysis can give the engineer insight into performance
trends and the benefits and penalties associated with certain design
decisions. Finally, these tools can be implemented to help define the
structure of simple, zero-level, Excel-based analysis tools that can assess
broad, expansive trade spaces allowing mission planners to begin to
formulate informed perceptions of mission performance trends. In this
paper, the application of these system engineering tools and
methodologies to the analysis of lunar mission architectures is discussed
as well as some of the results of those analyses.
This conference features the work of authors from: Georgia Tech’s Space Systems Design Lab, Aerospace Systems Design Lab, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Tech Research Institute; NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Marshall Space Flight Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, Langley Research Center; and other aerospace industry and academic institutions
Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/80242005-11-10T00:00:00ZPercy, Thomas K.The analysis of lunar mission architectures is a complex problem dealing
with many different propulsive elements and payloads moving through a
series of locations to deliver humans and cargo to the moon. While the
general systems engineering process is largely tied to the development of
an end product, many of the tools commonly employed by systems
engineers can be used to simplify these complex and abstract mission
analyses. These tools can help the analyst gain a better overall
understanding of the problem, its trends and possible solutions by better
defining element interactions and functions. Sensitivity studies that
employ trade tree analysis can give the engineer insight into performance
trends and the benefits and penalties associated with certain design
decisions. Finally, these tools can be implemented to help define the
structure of simple, zero-level, Excel-based analysis tools that can assess
broad, expansive trade spaces allowing mission planners to begin to
formulate informed perceptions of mission performance trends. In this
paper, the application of these system engineering tools and
methodologies to the analysis of lunar mission architectures is discussed
as well as some of the results of those analyses.Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicles
a Solution for Space Accesshttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/8025
Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicles
a Solution for Space Access
Furfaro, James A.; Johnson, Dennis G.
President George W. Bush set the bold vision and charter for NASA to
take the next steps in the exploration of our solar system in his
announcement on 14 January 2004. This exploration initiative provides
unique opportunities for the space community to work closely with
NASA to accomplish tasks that have been planned since the Apollo era.
In order for the NASA exploration initiative to be successful in today’s
environment, it must be reliable, affordable, and sustainable within a
realistic schedule.
Trade studies indicate that a two stage, solid / liquid configuration using
available heritage propulsion components is the most effective solution
to meet NASA’s schedule for crew access to space and the International
Space Station (ISS). Facilities and manpower are in place to process and
refurbish stage components maintaining a man-rated launch vehicle
infrastructure.
A heavy lift vehicle configuration can be tailored to support Moon and
Mars missions utilizing existing components. Lift capability can be
expanded with five segment RSRM derivative boosters and an extended
external tank. Shuttle derived launch vehicles provide the most reliable
and effective solution to meet NASA’s exploration vision schedule.
This conference features the work of authors from: Georgia Tech’s Space Systems Design Lab, Aerospace Systems Design Lab, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Tech Research Institute; NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Marshall Space Flight Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, Langley Research Center; and other aerospace industry and academic institutions
Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/80252005-11-10T00:00:00ZFurfaro, James A.Johnson, Dennis G.President George W. Bush set the bold vision and charter for NASA to
take the next steps in the exploration of our solar system in his
announcement on 14 January 2004. This exploration initiative provides
unique opportunities for the space community to work closely with
NASA to accomplish tasks that have been planned since the Apollo era.
In order for the NASA exploration initiative to be successful in today’s
environment, it must be reliable, affordable, and sustainable within a
realistic schedule.
Trade studies indicate that a two stage, solid / liquid configuration using
available heritage propulsion components is the most effective solution
to meet NASA’s schedule for crew access to space and the International
Space Station (ISS). Facilities and manpower are in place to process and
refurbish stage components maintaining a man-rated launch vehicle
infrastructure.
A heavy lift vehicle configuration can be tailored to support Moon and
Mars missions utilizing existing components. Lift capability can be
expanded with five segment RSRM derivative boosters and an extended
external tank. Shuttle derived launch vehicles provide the most reliable
and effective solution to meet NASA’s exploration vision schedule.Comparison of Return to Launch Site Options for a Reusable Booster Stagehttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/8026
Comparison of Return to Launch Site Options for a Reusable Booster Stage
Hellman, Barry Mark
There is a major need in the U.S. Air Force to develop launch vehicles that can be
used for Operational Responsive Spacelift and possibly be used for rapid global
Strike. One strategy to achieve these mission goals is to develop a Reusable
Military Launch System (RMLS) or a hybrid system which uses a reusable booster
with expendable upper stages. In support of the development work of the
Aerospace Systems Design Branch (ASC/ENMD) of the USAF Aeronautical
Systems Center at Wright-Patterson AFB, this study looked at comparing three
basic methods for Return to Launch Site (RTLS) for a reusable booster. These
methods are glideback to launch site, flyback using an airbreathing turbofan, and
boostback using the booster's main or secondary rocket engines. The booster
carries the upper stage(s) on its back to the staging point. Currently, most RTLS
vehicle studies either assume a glideback or flyback booster. Very little work
outside of the Kistler K-1 has been done to look at boostback methods. The
vehicle modeling was integrated into ModelCenter using the MDO method of
Optimizer Based Decomposition to handle the branching trajectory problem that
arises from the booster performing a RTLS maneuver. Each of the three vehicles
was optimized to minimize dry weight and gross weight separately in order to get
a better understanding if boostback can provide any advantages over the two more
traditional RTLS methods.
This conference features the work of authors from: Georgia Tech’s Space Systems Design Lab, Aerospace Systems Design Lab, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Tech Research Institute; NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Marshall Space Flight Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, Langley Research Center; and other aerospace industry and academic institutions
Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMThttp://hdl.handle.net/1853/80262005-11-10T00:00:00ZHellman, Barry MarkThere is a major need in the U.S. Air Force to develop launch vehicles that can be
used for Operational Responsive Spacelift and possibly be used for rapid global
Strike. One strategy to achieve these mission goals is to develop a Reusable
Military Launch System (RMLS) or a hybrid system which uses a reusable booster
with expendable upper stages. In support of the development work of the
Aerospace Systems Design Branch (ASC/ENMD) of the USAF Aeronautical
Systems Center at Wright-Patterson AFB, this study looked at comparing three
basic methods for Return to Launch Site (RTLS) for a reusable booster. These
methods are glideback to launch site, flyback using an airbreathing turbofan, and
boostback using the booster's main or secondary rocket engines. The booster
carries the upper stage(s) on its back to the staging point. Currently, most RTLS
vehicle studies either assume a glideback or flyback booster. Very little work
outside of the Kistler K-1 has been done to look at boostback methods. The
vehicle modeling was integrated into ModelCenter using the MDO method of
Optimizer Based Decomposition to handle the branching trajectory problem that
arises from the booster performing a RTLS maneuver. Each of the three vehicles
was optimized to minimize dry weight and gross weight separately in order to get
a better understanding if boostback can provide any advantages over the two more
traditional RTLS methods.